Check out Dana's latest post on TPM Cafe- The Budget Resolutions: Whose Largest Tax Increase in History?

Citizens For Tax Justice has a good piece on the "biggest tax increase in history" line being used by every Republican on the planet. The budget resolutions in the Senate and the House do not by themselves increase or decrease taxes, but they do make Congress "pay for" any further tax cuts by setting up PAYGO rules that ensure that new tax cuts do not increase the deficit. Enacting more tax cuts is what, in a legal sense, extending the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts would be, since they expire in 2010, and new legislation would have to be passed to continue them.

This afternoon, House Democrats announced they would permit consideration of three substitute budget proposals during debate of the FY 2008 budget resolution. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) said today he expected substitute budgets from the Progressive Caucus, the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC), and the House Republicans. While this is far more options than Representatives have had in the past under Republican rule, Some feel a notable omission from that list is the fiscally conservative Democratic Blue Dog Coalition. While the Blue Dogs are unlikely to support the Black Caucus budget or the Progressive budget because the spending levels are a bit too hot for their taste, they will not support the Republican budget either, because the tax policies and low spending levels make cold. By opting not to offer their own version, it seems members of the Blue Dogs Coalition felt the main democratic proposal combined the right blend of fiscal responsibility and funding for pressing needs. While reestablishing a commitment to paying for changes to mandatory spending and taxes in the budget, the Democratic Leadership plan still boosts discretionary spending levels for under funded and neglected national priorities and investments, such as Head Start, child care, and housing. The Democrats' budget would allow about $25 billion more in discretionary spending in 2008 than President Bush has requested, and about $7 billion more than the Senate-adopted plan. In addition, like the Senate plan, the House budget would add additional funds (and deficit-neutral offsets) for mandatory nutrition and health care programs. While this is only a first step in repairing some of the damage done to important priorities in the federal budget over the past six years and before, it seems the Democrats have used a recipe that is neither too hot nor too cold, but just about right.